News

Two Code Committee members resign

Thursday 12th of November 2009

Two members have resigned from the Code Committee of industry representatives that is working on the Code of professional conduct for financial advisers.

The Commissioner for Financial Advisers Annabel Cotton has accepted the resignations of Code Committee members Liz Koh and Patrick Middleton.

Koh and Middleton were attached to firms that gave advice that was ranked "rejected" in the recent Consumer New Zealand report on the financial advice industry.

Cotton says she accepted their resignations to remove the potential for loss of public confidence in the work of the Code Committee, not as any reflection on the professional competence of Koh, Director of Moneymax,  Middleton, former Head of Wealth Management at Westpac or either of these companies.

The Commissioner understands that both Moneymax and Westpac do not accept the findings of the Consumer survey.

"My paramount concern is ensuring that the public have confidence in the Code of Conduct for financial advisers. I am not making any judgement on the quality of advice given by any person or firm, or on Consumer's conclusions about that advice," she says.

The Code Committee was appointed by Ms Cotton in July 2009 to develop and maintain the Code of Conduct, which will form an important part of the new regulatory environment for financial advisers.

"The draft Code is expected to be completed early next year and will reshape the industry by setting minimum qualification standards, ongoing training requirements, and impose responsibilities for the advice given to clients," Ms Cotton says. The new regulatory regime for financial advisers is expected to be in force the end of 2010.

NEXT STORY: Cotton explains why Code Committee members forced to resign

Comments (2)
Clayton Coplestone
I would like to hear more from Bruce - as it is a refreshing reminder / wake-up-call about how consumers are really feeling. Come on industry - lose the rose-tinted glasses and start paying attention to investors.
0 0
15 years ago

Michael Donovan
Bruce & Independent Observer are at least two of the comments which reflect a disenchantment with the services provided by financial planners. There will always be lower class members of any group. Many of us will have experienced poor tradespeople, or medical advice and so on. The issue is whether there is in fact a relatively high number of poor advisers...or otherwise. Surveys can be quite useful if the methodology is correct and competent. The 'outcomes' are important, and if they are bad, they stick for a long time. Much like the age-old saying, " it takes a lifetime to build a top reputation...and only literally minutes to ruin it..."! This Consumer Mag survey has appeared to result in lasting damage to the financial planning profession, without doubt. I believe in the benefits of surveys, and I would actually like to see this area expanded on.... rather than lots of energy expended on picking holes in this one. The next one needs to be on the various fees charged, and the question of "supposed value-added." eg: The likes of the larger groups such as Money Managers have charged what they claim is a "monitoring fee" of 1% pa. If you compare the performance of a monitored portfolio to that of an UN-monitored one, the monitored portfolio performs precisely 1% pa less than it's UN-monitored 'sister!' Would this tend to suggest that "monitoring" is not actually applied? That is just one example of a fee which needs to be surveyed. Do you 'get my drift?' Other fees which can be added to the list are those which are more deeply 'hidden' inside related party transactions, where several in-house funds are used to filter investors money through to the ultimate fund, and while each 'little' fee along the way may be small, their sum total actually can amount to quite a permanent loss to the investor/s. Roll on the surveys I say. However, unless advisers (& investors) offer some advice on how any surveys are conducted, the barrow-pushing media divisions will retain their power and control, and as has been proven....to the long-term detriment of the financial planners. This would be of particular concern to those who have spent such a long time building their reputation...only to see it undermined in one short foul swoop.! Michael Donovan 'Old' Money Manager.
0 0
15 years ago

Comments to GoodReturns.co.nz go through an approval process. Comments which are defamatory, abusive or in some way deemed inappropriate will not be approved.